Limitations in daily activities, risk awareness, social participation, and pain in patients with HTLV-1 using the SALSA and Participation scales

• Autor(a) principal: Aben-Athar,Cintia Yolette Urbano Pauxis
• Data de Publicação: 2020
• Outros Autores: Pinto,Denise da Silva, Lima,Sandra Souza, Vallinoto,Izaura Maria Vieira Cayres, Ishak,Ricardo, Vallinoto,Antonio Carlos Rosário
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases
• Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413-86702020000600497
• topic: HTLV-1; Daily activities limitation; Social and quality of life; SALSA and social Participation scales

ABSTRACT Background: Tropical spastic paraparesis or HTLV-associated myelopathy (TSP/HAM) may prevent, limit or restrict the performance of daily living activities, and as a consequence, several aspects of life are affected. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate activity limitations, risk awareness, social participation, quality of life, and pain in individuals infected with HTLV-1. Methods: This was an observational, descriptive, analytical, cross-sectional study with a quantitative approach. An interview questionnaire, the Screening of Activity Limitation and Safety Awareness (SALSA) scale, the Participation scale, a quality of life questionnaire (SF-36) and the Brief Pain Inventory were used. Results: A total of 55 patients with HTLV-1 were interviewed (62% asymptomatic and 38% symptomatic). In both groups, there was a higher frequency of patients aged 41-50 years old (35.3% asymptomatic and 38.1% symptomatic), with complete secondary education (47.1% asymptomatic and 42.9% symptomatic), and married (64.7% asymptomatic and 52.4% symptomatic). Of the symptomatic patients, 33.3% were retired; among asymptomatic patients, 20.6% performed domestic activities. The majority of patients in both groups had not received blood transfusions. Sexual intercourse was still practiced by patients. After assessment, asymptomatic patients had no activity limitations (64.7%), and symptomatic patients presented limitations (90.5%). None of the groups showed good risk awareness. There was no restriction on social participation in 97.1% of asymptomatic patients and in 52.4% among symptomatics. Both groups complained of pain, being more frequent in the lumbar spine in asymptomatic patients and in the knees in symptomatic patients. Pain was more severe in symptomatic patients and affected aspects of quality of life. Conclusion: The clinical follow-up instruments must be adopted by healthcare professionals to monitor new symptoms so as to avoid the onset of limitations identified in symptomatic patients, in addition to enabling continuous surveillance of asymptomatic patients.